I provide commentary on political economy, police and prosecutorial abuse, and whatever else might come to mind.
Let justice roll down like waters,
and righteousness like an ever-flowing stream. Amos 5:24 (ESV)

Saturday, May 15, 2010

An Open Letter to Buzz Franklin

[Update, Saturday May 15 8:50 AM]: The prosecutors' pity party has begun. Channel 9 (Who else?) has interviewed Len Gregor and Chris Arnt and both men claim that more children will be molested in the future because of the Tonya Craft verdict. I cannot get myself to watch this pathetic interview in which I understand the 9 reporter almost breaks into tears himself, but I am making the link available for those readers and viewers with strong stomachs.

[End Update]

Buzz,

I really want to thank you for that immature and imbecilic press release you released on Friday, May 14. Granted, I was told about it just before I was to sing Faure's Requiem at our Cumberland Choral Society concert, but you didn't ruin the evening, although I might be tempted to blame you because I held a quarter note a bit too long and was not ready for the next note. However, I will refrain from pointing the finger. I just screwed up, Buzz, and I'll take the responsibility.

It was tough singing the Kyrie while realizing that you blamed me for Tonya Craft going free, but I'll have to live with it. However, given that you have made your statement, I am going to make mine. That I have decided to spend this evening sipping red wine and writing a reply is proof positive that I really have no life, although right now, I would rather be in my shoes than in yours.

My first reaction to reading this statement was this: YOU CAN'T BE SERIOUS! I mean, is this a joke? Do you realize how ridiculous this two-page fax really is? But, you are serious, so it is time for me to put on my serious cap, too. (Right after another sip of wine. I couldn't make it to the CAC-LMJD tonight and enjoy the cash bar -- and the girls in thongs, or pink leotards, and Elvis -- so this is the best I can do.)

So, Buzzer, let us go through this thing that you sent. (I need another drink, Buzz, as it is hard to be serious when reading this nonsense.) Before going through this silly press release, let me tell you first to get a life. You lost a case you never should have brought to trial, and just because your crack prosecutorial team of Facebook and The Man could not convince a jury to convict does not mean you need to go silly on me.

However, you did tell some whoppers, and I don't like it when Officers of the Court tell whoppers, so I am going to wade through this nonsense. (Really, I am. But first, another drink.)

First, and foremost, Buzz, the state's case sucked. My gosh, when you put high school graduates who "just remember" important details on the stand, and their testimony does not pass the smell test, and it is clear they are lying -- that's called PERJURY, Buzz -- then you don't have a case. You had lies, Buzz, and your code of ethics says you can't do that.

Tell you what. Before I go any further, let me give you the link to the Code of Rules and Ethics from the Georgia State Bar. You need to read it, and then get back with me. (That's worth another drink. Give me a minute to compose myself. The stuff I'm drinking is pretty darned cheap, surely not as good as what was served at the CAC fundraiser.)

We can cover that list later, but for now, we need to move on, as readers are going to get tired, and you know what that means: they stop reading, Buzz, and we don't want that to happen, do we?

Don't give me this "right of appeal" crap, Buzzie Boy. Your district has a very suspicious 98 percent conviction rate, and that alone should be enough to warrant a visit from the fellows at the U.S. Department of Justice. So, quit crying about how unfair it is that you could not throw an innocent person in prison for the rest of her life.

Let us deal with the local press coverage before we deal with my blog, for you were referring to it, weren't you Buzz? Hey, what did you want? Channel 9 was in the tank the whole time, kissing the posteriors of Chris Arnt and Len Gregor. I mean, how can it get better?

Oh, and just because Melydia Clewell had some doubts about the majesty of your case, your boy Gregor CALLED HER OUT while court was in session and threatened her? Give me a break, Buzz. These people have no duty at all to think that every case you bring into court is sound. They don't work for you, Buzz, period. You need to understand that Ms. Clewell, who is more intelligent than you ever will be, is a taxpaying Georgia citizen, and you work for her. You are NOT her master, no matter what you and your fellow prosecutors might think.

So, let us deal with the next paragraph, which is a doozie:

Combined with the dynamics of the internet blogosphere, it created an environment hostile to the State's ability to receive a fair trial and portrayed the victims and their families in a false and negative light. This was an integral, purposeful and shameless part of the defense strategy. This will result in child victims and their supportive family members refusing to come forward for fear of a similar portrayal in the public. My office has never tried cases in the media and we won't start now.

Buzz, give me a break. This is pathetic.

First, and most important, I always thought that Tonya Craft was on trial, not you, although I will make an editorial comment and say that since you have put yourself on trial, I would love to see you, Arnt, and Gregor in the dock for committing crime after crime. And, I would be quite happy not to see you get a fair trial, since fair trials don't exist in the LMJD.

Buzz, since you are a DA, let me teach you something about the law: IT IS UP TO THE STATE TO HOLD A FAIR TRIAL. Furthermore, Buzz, the defense had NOTHING to do with me.

There was a gag order, place by Gregor and Arnt, er, Brian House, acting on behalf of Gregor and Arnt, who ran the trial. Prosecutors aren't supposed to run trials, but from what I saw, the animals were in charge of the zoo, and the parrot sitting in the judge's chair kept saying, "Awk. Awk. He's on cross, He's on cross!" whenever one of your boys was berating a defense witness.

I need to let you know that NEVER DURING THE TRIAL, I had ANY contact with the defense. None. That means zip, nada, none. You called me a liar, Buzz, and I don't like that.

You know, the defense lawyers were honorable, damned honorable. They did not have unreported ex parte meetings with House, like your employees. They faced hostility that they never have faced before.

Second, are you telling me that it is perfectly acceptable for prosecutors to make noises, catcall, roll their eyes, mimic the defense attorneys, write comments disparaging the defense on Facebook pages and utterly disrupt the proceedings? Buzz, have you ever read the rules on "disrupting the tribunal"? It's on video, Buzz, and your boys have nowhere to hide.

And give me a break about the poor "victims'" families. I have seen Sandra Lamb in action, and after she committed perjury on the stand (telling us her daughter had not received acting lessons), I really lost any sympathy I might have had for her. Why you and your boys decided that they had to go all out to please this person, I never will know.

I won't deal with the recusal motion except to say that I have talked to other prosecutors, and they tell me that House should have taken a powder, even given his minor role. Appearances matter, Buzz, they really do. However, given that he always was looking to Arnt and Gregor for instructions on what to do next, I can understand why he hung around.

Let's talk about discovery, Buzz. Let's talk about the way that the prosecution kept out exculpatory evidence, such as Dr. Ann Hazzard's sessions with Tonya Craft's daughter, as Dr. Hazzard noted that LAST FALL Tonya's daughter STILL had not made any claims of sexual abuse to her.

Yes, this would have blown up Arnt's and Gregor's timeline, and, no, they could not have that. I mean, what is a trial in the LMJD if the prosecutors actually have to tell the truth? That is so unfair of those mean, nasty, defense attorneys who actually have expectations that prosecutors don't lie. (Time for another sip. It's your fault, Buzz. You are driving me to drink.)

The state went "above and beyond" discovery rules? What are you smoking, Buzz? The state introduced a ton of "I just remembered" evidence from Joal "I Just Remembered" Henke to Suzi "I Just Remembered" Thorne. It was perjury, Buzz, and your prosecutors suborned it, and House put it into evidence, so spare me this nonsense of the gracious prosecution.

As for Tonya Craft being a "child molester," let's talk seriously here. The jury said it believed she was NOT a child molester, and that is that. (And Arnt and Gregor knew it, too, but they knowingly brought a false case, which is a crime.)

So, now let us talk about that jury you slandered in your press release. First, the jurors swore they did NOT read the papers or my blog, so for you to claim that my blog influenced them is to accuse those jurors of committing perjury. Are you ready to charge them with crimes, Buzz? If not, then shut up. They did their job; you did not do yours, which was doing justice.

Second, those jurors saw your boys in action, and it was not pretty. The outcome was never in doubt, as the jurors saw through your ruse. Furthermore, your boys chose to call Dr. Nancy Aldridge, one of the most RESPECTED AND IMPORTANT prosecution witnesses in the state a "whore of the court" and someone who "lies for money."

OK, Buzz, are you ready to say that other prosecutors in Georgia and elsewhere who have used Dr. Aldridge to testify for their side are suborning perjury? Your people claimed that Dr. Aldridge committed perjury, lying on the stand. Are you ready to back up their claim and to call your fellow Georgia prosecutors liars? Can you handle that, Buzz? If the answer is no, then you need to understand just what you and that crack team of Facebook and The Man have done.

But it gets even better, as your statement really is the Gift That Keeps On Giving. Let us look at the following statement: My office has never tried cases in the media and we won't start now.

Uh, Buzz, have you ever heard of Rules 3.6 and 3.8 from your state's own rules for attorneys -- and that covers you and your boys? I have in front of me two things that Arnt said, both in violation of those rules.

First, there is the Facebook statement that Arnt made on January 27, 2010. Let me quote from what he put down in what is legally a PUBLIC forum: "Chris A. Arnt is wondering of Tonya Crafts lawyers are really insane of (sic) just trying to jack uo (sic) her defense bill?"

Now, why would Arnt make such a statement that violates the rules of conduct for prosecutors? Hmm, maybe he was trying to influence readers, which also would mean he was trying to influence future jurors in the case. Furthermore, a PROSECUTION WITNESS, Holly Nave Kittle, made a "thumbs up" notation on that Facebook page, which also violates the rules. Second, lest you think this is the only time Arnt made public disparaging remarks about Ms. Craft and her counsel, we also have this gem from the March 8 Catoosa News:

Craft’s four-attorney defense team, lead by Chattanooga lawyer Clancy J. Covert, argued in motions Monday that prosecutor Chris Arnt should be dismissed because he influenced a witness by advising Catoosa County sheriff Phil Summers to dismiss a subpoena; he told the media that Craft was “acting guilty” by taking her case public; and he talked about the case on his Facebook page.

And, you are trying tell us that your "honorable" prosecutors did not try this case in the media? Buzz, no prosecutor is permitted to declare to the media that a defendant is "acting guilty" by seeking to defend herself.

Are you aware that people are legally entitled to a defense in the United States and in the State of Georgia? (Oh, I forgot, one of the counties in the LMJD called itself the "State of Dade" and only declared itself as part of the USA in 1948. Maybe the "State of Dade" formulated new laws regarding criminal law, and your office goes by those laws. Or, maybe your office is a proud holdout of the old Soviet Union.)

So don't tell me that your office does not "try a case in the media." That is EXACTLY what Arnt was doing, and you and he were hoping that your office could put enough out there to influence jurors to have voted "guilty" in their minds even before the trial began. Are you aware that according to Rule 3.5(a), trying to influence a jury by the means done by Arnt can be considered grounds for disbarment?

It gets better, Buzz, if that is possible. When Ms. Craft was on the stand, Len Gregor openly accused her of not "cooperating with the investigation" because she would not be interviewed by the police unless she had an attorney present. Now, maybe it is because of the "State of Dade" influence or maybe because you learned your legal theories at Leningrad State University, but according to the U.S. Supreme Court's reading of the U.S. Constitution, what Tonya Craft did in securing counsel is fully within the bounds of U.S. law.

And, let me continue. There were a number of examples of the prosecutors falsifying evidence on behalf of your goons, and falsifying evidence also is grounds for disbarment. You want an example? Let me give you one.

Do you remember when Suzi Thorne testified that one of the children had "disclosed" an alleged sexual molestation action by the defendant AFTER Thorne had concluded the interview with her? She then claimed that while she did nothing to document or memorialize this supposedly momentous event, that she believed a detective had done it, but she could not remember who it was. (Oh, I forgot, you were to busy Saving the LMJD From Evil Elsewhere to attend any sessions.)

Well, it was Tim Deal to the rescue, wasn't it? Unfortunately, this alleged memorialized event had no documentation, even from Deal, in the discovery materials prior to the trial. However, that weekend, Voila! The "document" SUDDENLY APPEARED! Yes, Buzz, deus ex machina! Except that one did not pass the smell test. Instead, it was patently obvious that your boys manufactured "new evidence," which also violates the rules and can result in disbarment.

In fact, Buzz, had there been a conviction (and this jury, even with your goons running the trial, did not come close to convicting Ms. Craft), that accusation in open court before a jury would have been enough for an appellate court to overturn a guilty verdict. Let me put it another way: Not only did your office try the case in the media before the trial, but then your office openly and publicly called a very important person who often is a PROSECUTION witness in the State of Georgia a liar, and then one of your prosecutors openly declared that having legal counsel is a violation of the law.

Buzz, you need to read your law books. Maybe you need a refresher course, or maybe you need to stop confusing the laws of Nazi Germany with the laws of the USA and the State of Georgia.

I'll tell you what I will do, Buzz. I had stated that I would make it my mission in life to seek the disbarment of Arnt and Gregor. But, since you wrote this ridiculous and pathetic press release, I think I will turn in your name, too. Anyone who thinks like this, and who tries to put something over on the public really does not need to be practicing law.

So, while I know this is your last term in office, I will seek to have your license pulled altogether. Since you don't even know who is on trial (it ain't the state, Buzz), you really have demonstrated that you don't know anything about the law, so maybe you need to try something else, like selling life insurance.

I thought about going through the codes of ethics in detail, but, no, it is of no use. Since you are unfamiliar with the basics of a trial in which the state tries a defendant, I don't think the Rules of Conduct really will mean anything to you. Now, maybe the State Bar of Georgia will have a better sense of the rules than you, or at least I hope that is the case.

Nonetheless, by blaming everyone but yourself for being stupid, I think that you have demonstrated beyond a doubt that you are more clueless than I ever thought you could be. In the next year or so, you are going to be scrutinized like you never have been before. If I were you, I'd take up heavy drinking, since I think you are not going to like what you are going to face these next 12 months.

Buzz, let me tell you that it won't be just me. There are a lot of researchers who are interested as heck as to how much money you are pulling into the district with your faux child molestation cases. They really are interested in how you have a 98 percent conviction rate when your ADAs are not exactly the cream of the crop.

It is not my fault you lost your case, Buzz. If you want to know the truth, I decided to blog because I did not like your gag order and the fact that you had another McMartin case and I believed you wanted an innocent person to go to prison for the rest of her life.

I don't like malicious prosecutions. You can ask Mike Nifong about how I deal with lying and malicious prosecutors, and as far as I am concerned, your office has nothing BUT Mike Nifongs inhabiting it. Since you have no interest in clearing out the liars and the criminals, I will try to do that for you. In the end, I really do care about the LMJD and its people a lot more than you do.

Thank you Mr. Anderson for reminding Buzz that the honorable and trustworthy jurors did NOT read blogs, the newspaper, or watch the news about this case! What a slam to 12 or 14 people who spent over a month of their lives away from their employment, and worse. had to sit through the garbage his team brought as "evidence." These men and women have spoken of losing sleep, nightmares, and thankfully lots of prayer in coming to their conclusion. I did not hear anything from the two jurors that did speak out, about being influenced by blogs,etc. But I did hear one of them say that it was disturbing that the judge obviously favored the prosecution! Also there was a difference in the body language and facial expressions of the prosecution witnesses and the defense witnesses. It wasn't a blog or a tv reporter that lost your weak, imagined case. It was YOUR dream team for ever having taken this to trial in the first place!

I must admit, I read Mr. Franklins' comments and was torn between actually laughing out loud and amazement.

So Mr. Franklin, you claim your office "couldn't" get a "fair" trial? You're serious right? You make it sound like YOU were the defendant.

Lets see, 12 men and women made a decision. Now either you are accusing those fine people of perjury, contempt of court, misconduct and I am SURE if you really had anything on anyone of them you would think of more. I say this Mr. Franklin, because the ONLY way the state could not have a "fair" hearing due to the media and the "blogsphere (Dr. William Anderson to be specific) would be if those jurors were influenced by the said media and Blogs. Well then, that would mean they had committed crimes.

Is that what you are stating Mr. Franklin? Because not only did your dynamic duo get a fair hearing, they got MORE than that. They had a judge that was so obviously in their pocket as to be astonishing. His rulings bordered on the absurd as was apparent to every blessed lawyer who was following this case.

Your "award winning" staff present witnesses as "experts" for example, whose whole experience consisted of no degree and "some seminars". Who giggled, rolled her eyes, shrugged her shoulders, made smart ass remarks and in fact, in response to the question by the defense of "Isn't that a leading question" in regards to how she questioned the children, responded with "so what". Oh yes, Mr. Franklin, that is a fine example of professionalism and a wonderful example of the sterling work your "award winning" staff was doing.

Your "award winning" staff aligned themselves with a person who they KNEW had not only ignored a direct court order to have NO CONTACT with Ms. Crafts daughter but had also IGNORED a subpoena with the off hand remark of, "it was in Tennessee". I bet you know full and well who Judge Marie Williams is as you folks have reciprocal agreements. So, your "award winning" staff associates with lawbreakers as long as they will say what you WANT so you can keep your astonishing 98% conviction rate. Really? 98% is so far above any national average as to be frightening to the average person when considering how you must be getting those numbers. I honestly believe we saw a perfect example of how you get those numbers in this case.

Your "award winning" staff was willing to do whatever (and I mean that just as the word means) it would take to win. What really happened is they thought they were going to railroad this little school teacher like they most likely do about anyone else in your County. Whats wrong Mr. Franklin, not used to dealing with intelligent women who had more than 200 bucks to spend?

Let me tell you something about bloggers Mr. Franklin, had any of us, after seeing your case, your pitiful and obvoiusly manipulated evidence, hearing your incredibly ignorant, rude, ill educated witnesses, seeing the insulting, immature, rude and outrageous behavior of your "award winning" staff who spent hours talking about some poor womans breasts, thongs, whining in open court about the media, character assassination that had NOTHING to do with anything (nice try tho), dating men while single (oh the horror), being in good shape, drinking at her wedding (oh whatever shall we do), mowing the lawn in shorts (I think high heels would have been better) and the list goes on, had decided that she was guilty we would have gone after her with an axe.

THAT was the pitiful, embarrassing, rambling, off topic, unsubstantiated GARBAGE of a case your "award winning" staff put on.

If I was you, I would write both of them up at the least or fire them at best.

Suck it up Mr. Franklin and quit whining, your embarrassing yourself in front of a world audience.

My two cents. Mr. Anderson was far more eloquent (but then he had WINE, I only have ice tea).

I can not remain quiet any longer and after a lot of pray and many tears I will speak my mind. I realize this is not intended to be a means to bash anyone and that is not my intention. My family has been members of Oakwood Baptist Church for 14 years. The same church Mariam Boyd attends. I am socked and horrified the leaders of the church I love will not only condone but actually take sides in this matter. Mariam Boyd is not the representative of Oakwood's message of love and God's grace that Oakwood has stood for in the past. Mariam has attacked individuals that have supported Tonya and a lady walking the streets of Chickamauga for wearing a yellow shirt. These actions are dispicable and the leaders of the church should be reaching out to Tonya instead of condoning the actions of a teenage girl who is spewing the garbage she has heard her mother say over and over. I never thought I would say this but as my fellow church member stated in an earlier blog. My son will no longer participate in any youth activity at Oakwood that has Mariam Boyd associated with it. As much as it will sadden my wife, my family will be looking for a new church with leaders that value God's love and forgiveness over money and status.

Oh, the state couldn't receive a fair trial. Let's consider a couple of things.

1) When someone is arrested, and psychological studies have shown this, juries have an automatic tendancy to believe there is some guilt on the part of the defendant. They don't arrest people unless they're guilty, right?

2) The overwhelming amount of coverage of this case right up until Arnt & Goering (has anyone noticed I'm deliberately mispelling his name here?) made negative comments about certain members of the media, even those channels were more negative than neutral about Craft. Some stations (News Channel Slime) continue to portray Craft negatively--wonder and surprise that Arnt & Goering would appear on those channels. So, in effect, any negative coverage towards the prosecution was of their own making when they started attacking those stations' reporters.

3) Defense expert witnesses, as well as defense council members openly discussed their hope that jurors would NOT view any media reports. Kind of blows Buzz Cut's argument that the defense used the media. If they were using them, why would they try to have it so jurors would not pay attention to the media. A good comparrason would be in WWII, when building up to the Normandy invasion the Allies tried to deceive the Germans into thinking the invasion would take place near Callais. Ok, so if DLo was trying to fool the jury with false media reports and then tries to keep the jury from seeing such reports, that is like the Allies creating all the diversions and false intelligence about the invasion and then telling the Germans, "Pay no attention to the phony army we have under Patton, the real invasion is going to be near Caen." Foolish logic coming from Franklin is to be expected, considering the kind of logic coming from D&A (something that should evermore be referred to as "Thong Logic").

4) Far from making it easier on predators, if anything, this case has made everyone more paranoid about being around kids. Not one of us would ever want to be alone with a kid anymore, considering what they might accuse us of. Potential molesters would think more than twice before trying to get themselves into such a situation, knowing they don't even have to do anything and they can lose everything.

5) After reading his comments about how we would be better off if the media were not to report and people in the "blogosphere" were to be shut up and not allowed to discuss criminal cases, it is ironic that this man, Mr Franklin, share a similar name with a man who fought to have an amendment inserted into the constitution guranteeing the rights of the freedome of speech and of the press.

Anon 12:51. I have said it before, and I say it again: never tie your faith in God to the actions of people within the church. People will invariably let you down and offend you. God will never leave nor forsake you, and you can count on him always. His law and his love are unchanging. I am glad to see that you are doing the right thing. When people in the church offend you, rather than leave the faith, find a new congregation. My family had to do that when I was a child because of something that happened between my father and his best friend. Together they started that church, but my family ended up leaving and going to another because my dad's friend fell to the temptation of pride. My father still to this day regrets that he was never able to work things out with his friend. Still, he believes he made the correct decision in moving to another congregation. It is better to attend a different church than to sit on opposite sides of the sanctuary thinking ill of other members.

Gee, I wouldn't be surprised if after reading this newest post by you that Buzz and boys don't send their posse across state lines to confiscate your cheap bottle of wine as evidence and accuse you of wearing a thong, mowing the lawn in shorts and answering the door in a towel.

I just finished watching the full, unedited interview with the 2 stooges.

Wow, how different the perspective is before and after the editing. There sure were a lot of nervous side glances between the stooges, a lot of fast talking excuses to blame the defense by Thong Boy and Shifty Eyes. And just as I predicted there were no tough follow ups to the answers, except one. When asked about the raid on Hazzard's office, they claimed that was the way they had to get the records. After a lengthy b.s. claim designed to make the defense look uncooperative and sneaky, the reporter asked if they ever called Hazzards office to request the documents. No, he admitted, but ....

I know I'm wordy tonight, three posts in a row, but I've got a question for y'all.

What's the name of Sandra Lamb? Is it charles? If so, here's a post that could be attributed to him that I found on another forum:

Charles L.: May 14, 2010 at 7:37 amFinally, this farce is OVER!!! Now I won’t have to look @ this freak’s ugly face! Only a liberal jury and liberal, Godless media would declare this sick pedophile innocent. If the jury consisted of conservative Christian, pro-life Republicans, the perverted freak who be in prison! Always a criminal getting praised while the victims are villified. All Craft supporters are a-holes! They’re as sickening as Muslims! If George W. Bush were still in office, there’d be some decency! I can only pray those children that thing violated will be able to function normally is this wicked society. May Tonya Craft and friends burn in Hell for eternity! God will certainly cleanse the Earth of all wrongdoers!

Does that sound like anyone anyone here may know who is/was on the side of the prosecution? I know as gossipy as some people have been here against the Lambs, Boyds, and Henkes, this kind of venim has thus-far only come from those who thought her guilty.

Throughout this trial I kept expecting something more from the prosecution.

They at least started off with a reason to suspect the possibility that crimes occurred, after all, who wants to not believe little girls and make some allowance for inconsistency due to their ages.

Then we'd see the defense questioning add tremendously to that "inconsistency" problem, and the illogical claims that kept being added to those claims in the videos (always after numerous others with nothing reported).

The state's witnesses had only a few minutes each that was used to provide some form of evidence that would encounter problems through cross, and much impeached by the 'best of the best' as the defense experts testified.

The proof of innocence was practically at hand, but with 22 counts it's nearly inevitable that a few f those counts were left in need of proving a negative, proving it did not happen.

So that is where I kept expecting the state to make some strong points to convince the jurors of more than how the lawn was mowed.

When the cross examination of the defendant started, I assumed we'd see something done to tie Tonya to even the slim possibility she was at X location, on X time, on X gate and the jury could then at least make the presumption that the defendant MIGHT have committed one of the crimes.

Instead, I was left with the impression that somebody higher up the judicial ladder at the state had warned the prosecutors to at least back off on the nasty mannerisms they'd used throughout the trial, because they surely had more to focus on in that cross than the mowing habits.

Next, with that cross leaving me curious what the state's masterful secret plan was, I reviewed all I had to see what they might bring on in rebuttal. I even posted a comment here with my list of the defense witnesses and why the main reasons they'd testified, as I was sure the state had something of some sort under their hats,

Well, no rebuttal came. I then started thinking about what all the state had actually done in the case. It amounted to a few minutes with each of their witnesses and then character assassination with all on cross. Was I expecting too much from these attorneys?

Now "Buzz" displays his lack of abilities in this fax sent as what I've taken to be some kind of strategy to counter what all have observed and are complaining about now.

On top of that, the ADA's have now jumped on with Channel Nine (go figure!) to not only give us a Teaser Tape with bits of blame shifting and inaccuracies (guess they figure most viewers didn't pay attention), but they added numbers ONE and TWO and THREE for about FORTY minutes of the same thing.

Now I am left believing I was entirely wrong to have ever given any in the DA's office any credibility if these are the top three there.

Even if you skip the search for some liability - which will not be covered under their magical shield of immunity (brave boys at least!) should it be there - it is now just more tapes to add to the trial tapes as the national media is all working to show who the fools are here.

They are just plain stupid, and they even say they are upset some of us compared them to good ole Mikey. You just can't make this $#it up.

Oh my goodness, I had to pick my jaw up off the floor at 11pm as the "media" reported Mr. Franklin felt the STATE didn't get a FAIR trial! As if the list of incompetencies of the DA's office wasn't long enough, I can now add BLIND as a bat to it. I just have a few questions...1) What was the purpose of the gag order, if the media influenced the trial? 2) Why was the jury not sequestered during the lenght of the trial? After all, the media is now a concern of the DA's office not to mention they were looking to put this lady away for the REST OF HER LIFE? As a county taxpayer I would feel better knowing least these 12 got a comfortable stay for all the money spent on this fiasco! No, Mr. Franklin the state was treated very fairly, it's the citizens & taxpayers who got the short end of your stick.

anos 12:51. I have some suggestions for great loving churches in your area. However, at the risk of causing them ridicule I'm not sure how to give you this info. They in noway have any connection with this trial. I no longer live in the area but I do plan to visit this summer and I will attend them both. One, I will visit on occasion because it is the church I grew up in and the other I will attend as long as I am in town because I consider it my home church.

I keep hoping that the prosecutorial disease in Catoosa County is limited, just two bad ADAs. But then you go and write something like this, Buzz. Et tu, Buzz? Is the entire country riven with moral and mental disease? EVERYONE I talk to in Walker and Catoosa thinks you guys blew it and that it was more than a mistake, it was misconduct. If a poor workman blames his tools, a poor DA blames the press.

One line that jumped out at me in DA Franklin's fax was the following:

"My office has never tried cases in the media and we won't start now."

Well Buzz, I think you just did. You lost this case in every measurable way -- the jury said "not guilty", the polls given by all TV and newspapers found her "not guilty" by overwhelming margins as well. You lost in the Courthouse AND in the court of public opinion.

Sorry, but it's too late now for you to try your case. One, yours is a stupid, self-pitying argument; two, it's factually wrong; and three, well it's just bs and we all know it.

You and your buddies gave no comment until today and this is the best you could come up with? I'm not seeing how you're able to have a 98% conviction rate using this brainpower - doesn't add up. Maybe if the media and blogesphere were there at ALL your cases, the rate might be a little different.

I watched the Arnt/Gregor interviews on WTVC's website tonight and I've gotta say they looked like they were making a hostage tape. Nervous much? Arnt's eyes darted around so much I becamse dizzy watching, and Gregor, well Gregor just looked like any slow kid in middle school trying to talk his way out of something. No wonder they lost this case -- they don't have a clue -- they couldn't BUY a clue. Arnt looked like some guy caught on 60 Minutes with the twitches. I don't think Gregor is smart enough to even think everybody wasn't buying what he was peddling. Please, watch this -- it was very entertaining in a scary way.

They threw the jury under the bus in about five minutes. Blamed the blogesphere. Threw the defense under the bus for being dishonest and working with the media against the three little victims.

Their biggest whopper may have been attempting to describe how and why they broke in Dr. Hazzard's office. Now I will say this, they do have active imaginations -- guess what, they HAD to do it, AND they made copies and gave them to Dr. Hazzard afterwards and didn't even have to. They are just too precious and good.

Come to think of it, they changed my mind about the entire trial -- naw, I'm just kidding. They and Buzz quickly and convincingly showed me that I was right from day one to believe they were trying to railroad an innocent woman.

Being bullies and not being the brightest bulbs in the chandelier make for some scary good ole boys. You could tell they ain't one bit happy about getting their be-hinds kicked, and for some delusional reason they seem to think it's not over yet. Well, maybe it's not for them, but boys, Tonya Craft was found not guilty. You didn't prove your case because it was made up.

One final thought -- what a softball interview by Channel 9. Good lord, I thought John Madewell was going to give them backrubs before it was finished. He practially whispered any (very few) follow-up questions. Now let's see if the're real men and will do an interview with 5'2", 105 pound Callie Starnes on WRCB. I'm not holding my breath.

What truly baffles me is that they act as if we, the people, did not see everything that they did in court. They act as though we, including the jury, missed some blatantly obvious evidence that truly solidifies Mrs. Craft's "guilt."

I hope I'm not the only one who feels offended by their efforts.. They must think we are truly ignorant to believe the sh*t they are shoveling out.:)

(They might want to stop their little secret meetings as well. Let's pray no one will buy the scape-goat's they might try to sell.)

Very good commentary, Bill. Fantastic. How's that bottle of wine? I'd think it's gone. Hope it was a good year and vintage. My drink of choice while reading this is cranberry/pomegranate juice. Not as idea inspiring but I got a few from the 'interview'. Ah, gee, John Madewell. Who wrote that script? Hardline questions? From where? A SoftSoap container? Those good old boys don't even play the blame game by the rules. In fact, I had a much more lively time hearing my teen describe a girl fight at his middle school earlier this week. Yes, a shirt came off (according to him). And he and his friends admitted they enjoyed themselves. But they are really boys and have the right to enjoy a bit of fun here and there.The point is you lost and lost in such a spectacular way you spent most of the week coming up with the worst excuse of an interview and District Attorney response I have ever seen. So, a couple of things I noticed in that interview I watched until I had to shut it off so I wouldn't gag. Len Gregor, it was proved in court (maybe the judge didn't accept that proof, but the rest of us do) that you received the email of the defense's expert witness. There's a little thing on everyone's email called return receipt. It lets you know your email arrived and was opened by the intended recipient. So, if you're saying you never received it you're either a: the biggest, goofiest liar on the planet or b: someone else screens your emails and deleted that very important one with evidence from your case of the century without informing you. Do you really want us to believe one of your lackluster assistants would actually do that without your express orders? Uh, does that person plan to go down in flames with you? Have you ever heard of rats abandoning a sinking ship? It's called a survival instinct.You and Mr. Arnt claim you haven't heard of any federal or state investigation yet. Operative word here. Yet. Do you really believe the folks in those places will really come on up there and pat you on the back while saying, 'this one's in the bag. We'll make a play, maybe get rid of someone you don't like in your office, and it'll all go away.' Not happening. Unlike your case, which was evidently weak and a non-winner from the day the grand jury gave a true bill to those non-informative indictments, the people now working to end your despotic rule in this area are looking for the truth. Heck, we also want to discover something might have gone horribly wrong for you to have presented a case in which you so glaringly made so many errors. Still have to discover that nugget.

Part 2 since I got long winded again. Point 2: I really have to know this but must settle for being in the dark the rest of my life. You say you cross-examined the defense witnesses to the best of your ability. In every other part of this country, including the other areas of Georgia, I have only heard cross-examination of a defense witness based on what that witness testified to on direct examination. Yet, nowhere did I hear any of those witnesses testify to Ms. Craft wearing a thong or mowing her lawn in shorts and a sports bra or watching porn brought up by a vengeful ex-husband who 'just remembered' while driving to the courthouse.

Point 3: You could have tried this case on the moon and we would have had the same access to it. No other court in Georgia would have given you anything other than a chance to find yourselves having your jaws hitting the table as those same beautiful words repeated themselves over and over again. Not Guilty. Not Guilty. Not Guilty.

No longer can you call Ms. Craft a child molester. The jury didn't pay attention to the media or blogosphere. Heck, we still have to hear from them on the biggest blog that covered this trial. Isn't it time to say, 'we messed up. I guess we have problems to correct.' and get about the business of making LMJC a place to bring lawbreakers to justice rather than a laughingstock throughout the world. I live in this area. I use my real name when posting to this blog. And I fully expect repercussions from my views. But, as an American citizen, I have the right to express my views. It's called free speech, a tenet our founding fathers believed we needed to keep things like this trial from happening. But I guess since I didn't sit in a classroom absorbing what I wanted to for my chosen field, but instead defended my country honorably for almost 11 years before receiving an honorable discharge, I don't have a right to give you my opinion. Give me a break. My opinion comes in the form of a vote I will make sure counts during the next election. Be warned now. I will support Bill Anderson's efforts to take care of the mess you've made of LMJC. And I will vote in the next election. I know there's no box that I can check to indicate no confidence but I can write in Mickey Mouse. If enough of us do it, a mouse will be running LMJC. And he'll probably do a better job than the three of you!

Wow.How can they ever expect a person to serve on one of their juries again in the future. I would explain in the selection process that I knew the prosecutor was crooked and did not want ANY PART of it. It sure make me wonder how many innocent folks are in prison now. This is all very sad, but maybe the truth needed to come out.Either State law was broken here, OR state law needs to be changed.We now have a new slogan to replace "Innocent until proven guilty". Buzz now says "Guilty until proven innocent, then still guilty".Who voted for this kid?

Well Buzzy, you have now sealed your fate with the comment in your fax to the news stations. No judgeship for you, EVER! No political office, EVER! The mantra of your opposition will be REMEMBER TONYA! You will finally have to get a real job and get off the government teat, although hopefully you will be sans law license.

"I am disappointed in the verdict"

How can an attorney with any common sense not see the light by now? The defendant is the only person that didn't get a fair trial and yet she prevailed because of the lack of evidence and the sham of an investigation.

Buzzy, you know that polygraphs are almost impossible to beat. You must know that this teacher had an unblemished reputation as a teacher. The public cannot buy the state's position that she suddenly started molesting children after all that time, especially with the witnesses that the defense presented. I know "you're boys" called them "whores of the court". That's kinda strong don't you think?Especially when one of them has only testified for the defense 15 times out of a total of 200. She must have been really convinced, huh.

Oh yeah, none of that matters to you, but thank God it mattered to the jury. You are simply a piece of crap that will not and can not admit when your office has made a mistake. And you don't have the balls to fire your suck buddies. After all they know too many of YOUR dirty little secrets, huh?

Another thing Buzzy. I have never heard of a DA not prosecuting a case of this high a profile himself. Bill Cox in Tennessee always heads up important cases. You either didn't agree with this case being prosecuted in the first place (like it's been rumored) oryou are a frigging coward that let "your pathetic, narcicisstic, idiotic" minions take the fall for you. That way you could push for the case being tried, yet not really have to take the heat.

Guess what? The public (us) hold the head honcho responsible and we hold cowards in utter contempt. My daddy always told me, "a man that can't admit his mistakes, is not much of a man". Amen daddy.

I'm an attorney myself (NC & SC) and when I hear of prosecution 'success' rates like 98% I know that one of two things are occuring. Either the DA's office is under-prosecuting or over-prosecuting. Neither is justice. Unfortunately the US Justice (sic) Department has the same 'success' rate.

Bill, You are (THE REAL MAN). Look, if I ever make your most wanted list, call me and let me know so I can head for another Country. That wine?????? Please let me know the name of that cheap stuff, It must have been good stuff. Very nice comments. Fishman

The unedited interviews on newschannelslime with "facebook" and "the man" would be hilarious if it wasn't so damn scary.

"facebook" looks like he was caught with his hand in the cookie jar with his eyes continuously darting over to his big brother (the man) to help explain it to him mom. What pathetic creatures. When you think that these are the kinds of men who holds citizen's lives in their hands . . . frightening!

How these boobs could have a 98% conviction rate should be obvious to everyone, NOW! The LMJC Railroad is boarding, ALL ABOARD!

I hope you both lose your law licenses and that the innocent people who you put behind bars will finally get justice. May you both burn in hell for eternity.

12:51, I can feel the pain you have just by reading your words. An old friend once told me, you never go to church because of the people, you go for yourself...but as you grow up in the same church for years they become your family, and you love them. When one does something could affect the body of Christ, it's hard...I know how you feel. But the bible give us specific instructions on how to handle these situations. In Matthew 18:15 the bible says to go to that person talk to him in private and hope that he/she hears you. If not, then take 1 or 2 more...by the mouth of 2 or 3 witnesses every word may be established. verse 17...if he/she refuses to hear, tell it to the church. Now, this situation is a little harder simply because it's her "opinion" that is hurting your church, rather than an "actual deed." However, because we are all entitled to believe what we want about Tonya Craft, she has carried her beliefs into action. Her strong opinions should be kept to herself when/if it is going to affect her church. Since she is a "leader" in the church, then by all means her affects will have an impact. Would we allow our preacher to preach opinion from the pulpit...just just bible? Of course the answer is bible...so we have to expect the same from our Sunday School teachers, our youth leaders, our deacons, bishops, etc...Good luck to you and to your church. I will think of you in my prayers. Leaving a church is a hard decision.

Now...while I am in Matthew, let's remember ch 5...love your enemies...bless those that curse you, ch 6 do good to please God... ch7 Do NOT JUDGE....we need to pray for these families that are so troubled. The children are victims by their mother's hands...not Tonya's. Lord, take away their rest, make them see the truth and admit their wrong doings....only You can change their actions.

BILL, THIS IS MY FAVORITE BLOG! GREAT JOB!! If they did not realize the attention this case would get they are sillier than I thought! If they were worried about public influence, then they should have sequestered the jurors! DUH!!!!!!

After viewing the Arnt/Gregor interview I would like to make two comments,

#1 - Arnt refers to his Facebook comment being for friends and family eyes only. Absurd, you are less intelligent than I thought. To the best of my knowledge Facebook has never been referred to as the place to make comments in confidence. Similar to saying,"I have a secret but I'm only going to tell 30 people".

#2 - They refer to Dr. Lorandos as a "one trick pony". Make sure when updating your resumes to include how you spent untold taxpayer dollars only to be soundly whipped by a "one trick pony". You had a case weaker than sun tea and the usual performances were not up to the task of getting your conviction against a formidable defense.

A couple of questions, one directly related and one going back a bit. Is it correct that the defense expert interviewed the children and did not videotape? Assuming yes, it sounds like she really is an expert so what is the difference in when you tape, or not? (honest question, no malice intended, just to be clear)Next, a while back The Today Show had another expert who made it sound like Ms. Craft was undeniably guilty, and then turned around and referred to the Duke LAX case in a way strongly implied (if you don't know the case) the accused men were guilty. I was so put off by this "lady" that it turned my attention to this trial. Ok, one more question - I know I'm overlimit. For those who saw the prosecutors in person or extensively on video, is their demeanor on the interview video different from their demeanor in court? I was expecting swagger but it looked like they were still reeling. Does Arnt ever look anybody in the eye when he's talking to them or is this new to the video?

I wasn't going to do this but those silly interviews and the fax deserve just as silly a reply. Buzz, Facebook, and The Man, do you see that little light blinking out of the corner of your eye? It's your career dissipation light. And it's just gone into overdrive. A favorite quote of my teen from one of his favorite movies, Backdraft, but very applicable here.

Hey Bill my favorite wine comes in a box. Franzia it's delicious. If I drink the bottled stuff it is Robert Mondavi's Woodbridge White Zinfendel. Oh no I just admitted to drinking, if the Boob Team reads this their gonna try and accuse me of child molestation. LOL!!

That an officer of the court would say something betraying such a fundamental mistunderstanging of our criminal justice system speaks volumes about the system's true nature. Defendents are innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. This means the State has the burden of proof, not the defendant. The reality, of course, is given the expense necessary to martial even a decent defense in any criminal trial most defendants are forced to make plea deals lest their families be destroyed financially. Prosecutors know this and use it to their advantage. I am willing to believe that most people charged and brought to trial are indeed guilty but a conviction rate of 98 percent is hard to believe. This type of prosecutorial abuse is all too common. It will continue until they are held personally responsible.

The woman in question is Wendy Murphy, who often has appeared on the Nancy Grace show. She is an attorney from Massachusetts, and she is a pathological liar.

During the Duke case, she made a number of off-the-wall statements that were not true, including a claim that the lacrosse players had "ripped open" the vagina of Crystal Mangum. Medical exams found nothing of the sort.

She also claimed that the defense was holding back "proof" of the crime by not allowing 1,000 pages of "evidence" in the Duke case to be released. That "evidence" turned out to be her medical and especially psychological records, as she has been diagnosed as being "mentally ill" and is on all sorts of prescription drugs for psychosis. The woman is a diagnosed psychopath.

Of course, I also believe that Murphy is a psychopath, and for Today to have that evil person tells me that they are not serious about dealing with criminal issues.

Trust me, they had swagger in court. They were oblivious to the fact that they were coming across as complete ninnies. I actually felt embarrassed for them! Gregor's "fishing lure" rebuttal would have been hysterical were it not for the fact that he actually seemed to feel that he was doing something so powerful and pivotal. They were so certain of their victory that they were blind to the reality that they made fools out of themselves every day in court. Of course they were sure they'd win the case...they always have before! Until somebody came in town and upset their little apple cart, that is. They refer to Dr. Lorandos as a "One Trick Pony" repeatedly. Truly, Dr. Lorandos does have a trick or two that Arnt and Gregor haven't caught on to yet: Truth and Dignity. I think it is so dishonorable and insulting to the good men and women of the jury to continually imply that they were influenced by the media, or that they based their verdict on the defendent's appearance. The jurors that have spoken out have made it clear they felt that the state's case was weak from the start and that it never should have even made it to trial. These folks took their responsibility seriously. They prayed...they wept...they agonized over the obvious torment that the children had been subjected to through this process. To suggest that they considered this anything less than a grave responsibility is horribly demeaning. Arnt and Gregor still seem to be under the delusion that they had compelling evidence sufficient to convict Tonya. I am certain that they felt that way, and continue to today, due to the fact that up until now, simply choosing to bring a case to trial got them a conviction 98% of the time. It took this case with it's unique aspects to bring this horror to light. Why,oh,why did I watch the Channel 9 interview this morning?? Now I'm not going to be able to keep anything down all day. These "men" disgust and sicken me.

This district, apparently, is a national leader in this area, and it is all about getting Mondale Act money. They make specious charges, get the CAC to provide false witnesses, and then they get "paid by the 'child molester'."

This is all about the money, and the reason they fought so hard and dirty to convict Tonya Craft is that her acquittal now sheds light into this smarmy scheme and now these people will be scrutinized.

I'm doing my own investigation and others are researching it, too. There is much, much more that is out there, trust me.

Oh, Bill, you'll have to let us know just what that more is as soon as you can. I understand the need for privacy as you build this information into what you'll need for the Bar Association, but I wonder just how bad this is and if a Civilian Review Board will have any impact. The two I've researched so far, one in Atlanta and the other in Chattanooga, had numerous articles about how ineffective they are, due to how the cops withhold information from them. That leaves my plan 2, inundate the correct offices with letters. Stamps are not much. Paper and ink either. Not when you compare those costs to the cost of spending the rest of your life imprisoned by the tag, child molester.

The above is a guide to professional conduct and performance, and not a basis, in of themselves to prosecute a complaint. However, the section could be relevant in a proceeding, sort of like a standard of care in a medical malpractice case.

Not only has he violated the ABA standards, he has gone further by accusing the jury of misconduct. I would venture to say that in many jurisdictions, the trial judge would be calling him on the carpet for accusing the jury of crimes. Of course, we can't expect that in this case.

Hey I just heard about this story an linked to this blog through Radley Balko's blog. As someone who reads Reason Magazine, this sort of thing does not surprise me one bit.

In fact this exact thing happened in Kern County, California under the disgusting DA Ed Jagels. In his case, 25 of 26 sex abuse convictions were overturned for because he hid exculpatory evidence. And, amazingly, this guy is now an advisor to Meg Whitman, the candidate for governor!!!

I grew up in Texas but I live in Canada now and there is a HUGE difference between the Canadian and US justice systems. First, Ive seen stats that say that the conviction rate in the US as a whole is 95%. Im not sure if that is just federal prosecution, just state prosecutions or both, but thats the figure I have seen. You know what the comparable rate is here in Canada??? 55%

Its actually unbelievable how prosecutors in the US are allowed to rampage and act like they are above the law. There has been a few wrongful convictions here in Canada, but it is an insignificant number when compared with the United States. Also I might add, there was a few false convictions based on the testimony of a "bite mark expert" but as Balko reported the government did everything possible it could be prevent it from happening again. http://reason.com/blog/2009/12/09/a-tale-of-two-forensic-scandal

My heart goes out to Tonya Craft and her family. This is absolutely disgusting what happened. But it is also a result of governments and the media for years trying to cover-up false allegations.

Speaking of which did any of you watch Bill O'Reilly and his segment on this case? He basically glossed over the disgusting conduct of the prosecutors and made it sound like it was an OJ acquittal. And you constantly have this rant coming out of Fox of "Liberal judges who are soft on crime." In fact with 95% conviction rates it is precisely the opposite. Its time people start calling out the national media too and people like BillO and Nancy Grace who indirectly feed the climate that gives rise to these false allegations, convictions and rampaging prosecutors and judges.

Finally if you think Judge Brian House is bad, just look up Judge Jack Skeen from Smith County Texas.

THROUGH THE FIRE by The Crabb FamilySo many times i've questioned certain circumstances. Or things I could not understand. Many times in trials, weakness blurs my visionAnd my frustration gets so out of handIts then I am reminded I've never been forsakenI've never had to stand the test aloneAs I look at all the victoriesThe spirit rises up in meAnd its through the fire my weakness is made strong

Chorus:He never promised that the cross would not get heavyAnd the hill would not be hard to climbHe never offered our victories without fightingBut He said help would always come in timeJust remember when your standing in the valley of decisionAnd the adversary says give inJust hold on, our Lord will show upAnd He will take you through the fire again

Bridge:I know within myself that I would surely perish But if I trust thehand of God, He'll shield the flames again, again

WOW...GREAT STUFF BILL!! Thanks for making me laugh so hard it almost brought me to tears, and I'm not even drinking wine.

In reference to you saying you have no life, it seems we all are the only ones who DO have a life in comparison to Buzzie Boy(my new favorite), Facebook, The Man, Deal or NO DEAL, Outhouse(which by definition means: an outbuilding with one or more seats and a pit serving as a toilet. This would provide enough SEATS for the whole gang...or should I say pit?), & the whole perjuring gang. Lest we forget the wolf in 'Lamb's clothing we saw on Ch. 3 news this week.

You are doing an honorable thing here Bill. Maybe YOU should be the one wearing the black robe. It infuriates me to think these ***holes(sorry, but I call it like I see it)knowingly tried to send an innocent woman to prison for life. This just fuels my fire even more. So they can keep crying, & we can all just keep fighting for what is right.

Now I think I'm going to go out and buy a cheap bottle of wine and celebrate Tonya's freedom tonight. I usually prefer White Ziffendel Beringer, but tonight it will be 'Almaden burgundy' in honor of you Mr. William Anderson. ;)

Actually one more important thing that needs to be said: If Ms. Craft didnt spend all that money to fight the case, would she have been convicted by these thugs?If the answer is yes, then there are some serious questions about the convictions of people with public defenders who dont have the money to bring in actual medical experts to testify for the defense like Ms Craft was able to do.

Will be interesting to see if any of the national networks pick this up for one of their shows such as 60 Minutes, Dateline, etc. and if so, what they dig up. Could be alot more exposure that those "good ole boys" want. Thanks for all the work you've done on this, Mr. Anderson.

I am from Chattanooga and have a rather large group of supporters that meet sometimes daily for prayer sessions.In this mornings sessions we talked about Mr. Franklin and "crew". After we discussed the faxed letter, we set out in prayer for this neive gentleman.We pray that after he has lost his position in the next election(or to the powers that be) - that he will too will pray for himself and his "judicial family".We are in Chattanooga, but would love to help in anyway we can. We can't vote in the next election for we are all citizens of Hamilton County. BUT - we all have friends and family on that side of the border to which we will keep informed.What can we do?Can someone please tell me all the ways that non-citizens of the Catoosa County district can make a difference?We are willing to write letters, make phone calls, and even BLOG (yes I said BLOG - Mr. Franklin) about the injustice in this case.

Not one of us knows Tonya, or anyone involved in this case. This is just a group of Moms in Chattanooga wanting to fight for justice.Please update me on anything we can do.

Moms of Chattanooga. Contact me on kathispray@yahoo.com I'm trying to put together folks trying to do something about this mess. And do I have a few questions for you about something I heard about going on up there. You might be able to point me in the right direction.

Professor Anderson, we are living in an era of "false but accurate" (thank you, Dan Rather) advocacy. Truth is an inconvenient detail in the political sphere, the science "industry" , and our justice system. Many people believe that ...to "do good"...a little lying and falsification can be excused or even admired. . Here's a intriguing insight into how Climate scientists began fudging data..to deny nay-sayers any "ammunition" against what they assert as a great and noble cause. In doing so, prominent scientists were led to compromise their own science. In many arenas, there is no outrage over this. As we learned in the Duke lacrosse case, many people are now conditioned to see the truth as quite easily expendable if it threatens their noble agenda.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,694484,00.html

The prosecutors in this case obviously saw themselves riding in on a white horse...defending children, prosecuting a perverted child molester. The "ends" justified any means ...any means at all. Somewhere in the mix, were, of course, massive egos, personal power, hometown ambition and a refusal to lose face by losing the case. They are outraged that their extreme "effort" was not appreciated. They put on a "false but accurate" (in their minds) case. I suppose, in those parts, for a long time, that must have been enough.

All of us have to realize however, that nothing will change ANYWHERE, until every one of us refuses to tolerate this type of advocacy EVEN when it's OUR pet issue, OUR politics, OUR church, OUR employer (get that lying GM pay-back ad off the air) or whatever is most dear to ourselves. We have to let the truth trump anything and everything and tolerate no politician, minister, scientist, judge, district attorney, ADA, friend or foe who would do otherwise.

I found it interesting how the prosecution kept referring to the media and internet coverage when crossing witnesses. It was if they were begging the jury to go and look up items on the case. Perhaps, they knew the verdict was obviously going to be not guilty and they were simply preparing the it's wasn't a fair trial excuse.

The body language of the prosecutors seemed clear to me that they were not being completely honest. I would like to see newschannel 9 have their "expert" look at that as they did Tonya Craft.

After reading that... I am in tears... I cannot stop laughing!!! That was pure comedy... I thought the Buzzard's fax was funny, but no, this was so much better! Mr. Anderson, you are my hero!!! I cannot believe he is blaming you and Melydia Clewell for the not guilty verdict. I think what he meant to say is he gives the two of you credit for the verdict, and while I am on that subject, if the douche bag was so worried about the media involvement then why didn't he sequester the jury??? All I can say is YOU IDIOT!!! Be glad that the trial by jury system finally worked in your stupid little county worked...However it is making me wonder if there is truth to the song "The Night That The Lights Went Out In Georgia", and no I'm not kidding

Does anyone else ever ponder the name Buzz and that Buzz has a brother who holds the ever infamous weekend of debauchery in Wildwood Georgia called WILD IN THE WOODS where Lawyers and Strippers and many people who would never socialize publicly all party in a communal campout for three days? http://www.wildinthewoods.com/

Did anyone catch in Part 1 with Chris Arnt he said they had saw some of the blogs? Yet in the 2nd part Arnt says they didnt look at any of the blogs. He also states that the defense was the ones who had broke the rules in discovery. I guess the defense didnt have a team of agents go into the LMJD and raid all the files pertaining to this case like the prosecution did to one of the defense expert witnesses.

Congratulations Anon 1:04 "Knock,Knock" - you hit the nail on the head! Hilarious! I have to admit that I'm no longer lurking on this blog. Bill, I've been following you since your first post about Tonya's case back in March or so, gosh it's been so long now that I've forgotten exactly how long ago. When I first heard the gossip about Tonya's arrest and possible ousting from Chickamauga Elem School, I could see the train a-comin'. The railroad of the "block wall club". Residents of Chickamauga know what I'm referring to. I've seen and experienced this club firsthand, knowing what power there is - both in number and in scorned women. I have personal relationships/interactions with Wilson, Lamb, and Boyd families in Chickamauga over many years. When I heard of the gathering of parents (on the first day of the school year following the accusations) demanding that their children not be placed in her classroom, I felt compassion for a teacher that was to soon find herself caught up in the (her words) Perfect Storm. Personal vendettas are difficult to fight on a normal day, but much more so when all of the legal hoop-la that has made it's way into this case compounds on top of vengenance.

I am a wife, mother and teacher in the local school system surrounding this case and I am scared to death about the power of personal vendetta and the loonies running the show in the LMJC. I am educated with a Masters Degree, as is Tonya, and I know the importance of research and knowing how to research effectively. I also know that the research that she conducted during this time was the foundation that put together Dr. Lorandos and his team. I honestly don't think that Tonya stood a chance without these men believing in her innocence. Congratulations to you, Tonya, for having the background knowledge and education that supported you well in this entire situation.

I have taken flack for my stand. I've spoken out and been dissed by my own family who are well known in Chickamauga. However, I will continue to firmly believe that the fight to rid the county bozo's rests with the people here, and with education. I encourage all to read and know what is happening. Speak out to those around you who can influence voting at our local elections. Bill's blog is a superb place to stay informed as to what is happening here in this area, but each person must use their own voice during the election.

Thank you, Bill, because of you, this entire mess seems to be more bearable because I've learned the importance of protecting myself from those in power around me.

Wow! Is all I can say. This Anderson dude is phenomenal!! Hopefully, there will be a full outside investigation into these joke of a prosecuting team. Anyone who is so arrogant as to behave as these clowns openly did don't deserve to in any form of practice of law. Not only should they all be disbarred, but they should be in prison and facing heavy penalties, along with that actress of a mom, Lamb. How many others they've circled their wagons and railroaded in similar fashion? Thank you! Mr. Anderson!!

I am also a lurker since April, and am from a town near Catoosa County. I just wanted to say thank you to William Anderson for this blog, and for all you're doing to investigate and publicize this case. Thank God for that Not Guilty verdict! It makes me feel so sad for all the surely wrongfully convicted prisoners from the LMJC, who didn't have the financial resources to fight the charges against them. Sigh.

I ended up going to bed early last night, but not before hearing details about "Turtle" Franklin's pathetic fax implying the jury had been compromised, in which case he should have moved for a mistrial. Gee, he missed a chance to try her a second time, darn it!

This is a repost, and I will repost until Mr. Anderson requests I stop. In order to achieve justice, citizen action is needed, and the only way to do it is by writing the appropriate authorities regularly and consistently.

As a citizen residing within the Lookout Mountain judicial Circuit, I am writing to see about the possibility of the Georgia State Attorney General's Office, and the U.S. DOJ Law Enforcement Coordinating Committee coordinating with the Prosecuting Attorneys' Council of Georgia for investigating and prosecuting the official misconduct of the officers of the Court in the Lookout Mountain Judicial Circuit, as being a pattern and practice to deprive the citizens of the Lookout Mountain Judicial Circuit of their constitutional rights to fair trial. This pattern and practice extends not only within the criminal prosecutions conducted within the circuit, but civil actions as well, as all four Judges, Judge Wood, Judge Graham, Judge Van Pelt, and Judge House have destroyed so many families by their behaviors and practices. When is the law going to be FOR the people, and not the officers of the Court? For the purpose of Section 242, acts under "color of law" include acts not only done by federal, state, or local officials within the their lawful authority, but also acts done beyond the bounds of that official's lawful authority, if the acts are done while the official is purporting to or pretending to act in the performance of his/her official duties. Persons acting under color of law within the meaning of this statute include police officers, prisons guards and other law enforcement officials, as well as judges, care providers in public health facilities, and others who are acting as public officials. It is not necessary that the crime be motivated by animus toward the race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status or national origin of the victim. Authorities: 18 U.S.C. SECTION 242 The Government must prove four elements to establish the offenses performed by the Defendants. First: The person upon whom the alleged acts were committed must have been an inhabitant of a state, district or territory of the United States. Second: The defendant must have been acting under color of law.Third: The conduct of the defendant must have deprivedthe victim of some right secured or protected by the Constitution of the United States. Fourth: The defendant must have acted willfully, that is, with a specific intent to violate the protected constitutional right.

I urge all of you to act promptly and diligently to see justice is served for the citizens of the Lookout Mountain Judicial Circuit.

Sincerely, ________________________

Include your name and address below your signature.

This can be used as a form letter. Feel free to copy, paste and mail 3 letters.

The JQC should have enough before them to work with already, so I pulled it from the suggested letter. For less than 3 bucks, we can state our opinion. Hell of a deal.

Didn't "Facebook" run against OUThouse for judge. That's really scary now isn't it? Can you imagine that shifty eyed man presiding OVER a court of law?

What's even scarier is that Buzzy, Facebook, the man, and outHouse, is the best that district has to offer.

That UNEDITED newchannelslime interview will stick in my mind forever. Facebook's eyes kept darting about like a schizophrenic mental patient while trying to convince himself and us that he was doing the right thing.

If those two guys really knew how the world sees them they would probably commit suicide. Their careers are over and deep down they know it. It will take their disbarment for it really to hit home.

What I find appalling about Buzz's statement about the jurors is that it is directly contrary to what his office submits to the appeals court on virtually every appeal. Credibility of witnesses by state law (O.C.G.A. 24-9-80) is exclusively within the province of a jury. Therefore, jurors aren't bound by the statements made by witnesses unless they BELIEVE them. Whether a juror is believable is evaluated by how they speak, how they look (do they look nervous, sweaty,e tc.), their record or lack of it, and a host of other intangibles! Therefore, since Tonya testified, that is exactly what they were duty bound to do - decide if she was telling the truth. What they jurors said (if they said it) was exactly their impression as they rendered in the verdict. They summarized their verdict very nicely by saying, we looked at it all, heard it all, and in the end we thought she was telling the truth because the state didnt show us otherwise. Put a blind fold on your jurors Mr. Franklin and see how your conviction rate drops. Thats basically what you are saying ought to occur. Your statement is legally incorrect, contrary to law, and contrary to what you write in appeal briefs all the time. Once again, one has to question the depth to which you will go to smear Ms. Craft. Mr. Nifong found out, perhaps you will too.

"Spokesperson Holly Kittle says despite the criticism, they would bet the bank, the CAC's therapist go through extensive training."

You mean , as an example, the extensive training of Ms. Thorne "I have no degree but I am taking online courses for my degree.. And I took some seminars"

Or lets talk about your training, what you testified to shall we? Lets see, a degree in Anthropology. Well, that certainly gets you ready to do psychological interviewing .. uh huh. Oh yes, I forgot, before you did your interviews, you had worked for the CAC for "two months" but you took some seminars! Prior to that you were a crime scene technician. Ms. Kittle, I am fairly certain (given my 15 years as a FNE), that being a crime scene tech, in NO WAY is preparatory to doing Pediatric forensic interviews. You mean that extensive training?

What about Laurie Evans, intentionally ignoring a no contact order from Judge Williams and intentionally ignoring a subpoena. You mean this sterling example of a counselor who intentionally and willfully breaks the law?

Of all the persons they could have had to speak for them, they chose you? After your performance (yes performance) on the witness stand? Your admitted lack of knowledge of the most current procedures and literature was not only appalling, but shameful. Your rude attitude complete with shoulder shrugging and eye rolling simply showed everyone what a "real" professional you are.

So you're the best the CAC could do? How embarrassing for them.

I would recommend that anyone having children seen at your facility run, don't walk, away and find actual professionals, with like.. degree's and everything. I wouldn't put my dog in your care Ms. Kittle nor that of the CAC at this point.

grits said...A couple of questions, one directly related and one going back a bit. Is it correct that the defense expert interviewed the children and did not videotape? Assuming yes, it sounds like she really is an expert so what is the difference in when you tape, or not? (honest question, no malice intended, just to be clear)Next, a while back The Today Show had another expert who made it sound like Ms. Craft was undeniably guilty, and then turned around and referred to the Duke LAX case in a way strongly implied (if you don't know the case) the accused men were guilty. I was so put off by this "lady" that it turned my attention to this trial. Ok, one more question - I know I'm overlimit. For those who saw the prosecutors in person or extensively on video, is their demeanor on the interview video different from their demeanor in court? I was expecting swagger but it looked like they were still reeling. Does Arnt ever look anybody in the eye when he's talking to them or is this new to the video?

May 15, 2010 9:45 AM

Allow me to attempt to answer some of this for you. The expert they are referring to was Dr. Ann Hazzard. This interview was done with Ms. Crafts children in regard to a bond modification hearing in Nov of 2009. The defense was asking that Ms. Craft be allowed to see her children with supervised therapeutic visitation. The interview in question was not a forensic interview (thus not taped) as it was not done as part of her defense effort. The prosecutors successfully blocked Dr. Hazzard from submitting her notes of the interviews or speaking about those interviews during the trial.

The Today show "expert" is Wendy Murphy, who at best is an ambulance chaser. She makes her living making uninformed but very dramatic statements. For instance, she claimed on the Today show that the children had substantiated injuries. This of course was complete nonsense but makes for good ratings.

Had they acted on camera like they did in the court room, it would have made for a poor version of the three stooges. The fact that he was unable to look into the camera is an indication of dishonesty and the fact he himself didn't believe what he was spouting.

I will end this with a note to him as well.

So Doofus, your FB wasn't hacked, one of your "friends" sent it. Damn, even your friends see you for the liar you are.

He just insulted a 12 member jury pool suggesting that they couldn't take a closer look at the evidence due to a pretty face. I imagine a couple jury members will come forward and say No. We voted not guilty because it was a piece of shit case.

Watched a bit of Channel 9's softball interview with the Dishonest Duo. A taste:

They blame the jurors for supposedly judging Ms. Craft innocent based on superficial considerations (she doesn't look like a child molestor). But, of course, the interviewer doesn't mention that the prosecutors wanted the jurors to judge her GUILTY based on superficial considerations (she sometimes dresses sexy).

They whine about the defense team's "media campaign," but -- again, of course -- it was no problem for them to publicly smear Ms. Craft before the judge issued a gag order.

You lost, boys, because you got caught with your pants down trying to railroad an innocent woman into prison. You were outmatched by superior attorneys, and Mr. Anderson shed the light of truth on your dark little racket, which must have come as quite a shock to you.

If there were any real justice in this world, you would both be sent to prison for the length of time you were trying to put away Ms. Craft, plus the length of time you've caged other innocent people. That's probably a life sentence, boys. Instead, the best we can hope for is that you'll be disbarred, as well as publicly shamed. This latter punishment is already in progress.

Mr. Bill,You rock! I think you did an awesome job of getting the truth out. I do not live in Catoosa County, but now I fear just driving through there. What a scary place! I wonder if they have a portable fire hydrant like Boss Hogg used???? I think the Kangaroo Court stepped out of an old episode of the Dukes of Hazzard....

William Anderson you are going to have to force yourself to watch all 40 minutes of that interview while it is still up.

About the 98% conviction rate issue, I think that is a bad line of inquiry. If the conviction rate was 50%, that would be a red flag that they are bringing bad cases to trial or botching good ones. If it was 100%, you would have to question if the court system was capable of producing a non guilty verdict. 98% is not alarming.

To anon at 1:57 who says """Arnt admits to breaking law code and having private conversation concerning case with witnesses"""Can you break that down for us please?

The "trio" should listen to this song! And the Lambs,Wilsons and McDonalds!

You can run on for a long timeRun on for a long timeRun on for a long timeSooner or later God'll cut you downSooner or later God'll cut you down

Go tell that long tongue liarGo and tell that midnight riderTell the rambler, the gambler, the back biterTell 'em that God's gonna cut 'em downTell 'em that God's gonna cut 'em down

Well my goodness gracious let me tell you the newsMy head's been wet with the midnight dewI've been down on bended knee talkin' to the man from GalileeHe spoke to me in the voice so sweetI thought I heard the shuffle of the angel's feetHe called my name and my heart stood stillWhen he said, "John go do My will!"

Go tell that long tongue liarGo and tell that midnight riderTell the rambler, the gambler, the back biterTell 'em that God's gonna cut 'em downTell 'em that God's gonna cut 'em down

You can run on for a long timeRun on for a long timeRun on for a long timeSooner or later God'll cut you downSooner or later God'll cut you down

Well you may throw your rock and hide your handWorkin' in the dark against your fellow manBut as sure as God made black and whiteWhat's done in the dark will be brought to the light

You can run on for a long timeRun on for a long timeRun on for a long timeSooner or later God'll cut you downSooner or later God'll cut you down

Go tell that long tongue liarGo and tell that midnight riderTell the rambler, the gambler, the back biterTell 'em that God's gonna cut you downTell 'em that God's gonna cut you downTell 'em that God's gonna cut you down

Thank you Mr. Anderson. Those of us who live in this area appreciate your knowledge and efforts in helping us rid ourselves of these parasites we are PAYING to persecute - NOT prosecute - our citizens. I assure you I would vote for Daffy Duck and even campaign for him, over the buzzard, summers and especially outhouse!

I agree. I watched the story and was amazed at the woman's arrogance. I suspect that they don't teach CAC personnel to shrug their shoulders, roll their eyes, and give stupid, evasive answers. They learn that on their own.

“As far as I was concerned, and the other jurors told me they felt the same way, neither closing argument really swayed us one way or the other, the prosecution especially,” Butch said. “That fella that closed things for them (lead prosecutor Chris Arnt), he lied about testimony, trying to confuse us…. and every one of us caught it too.”

“To be honest, I know that every juror would like to forget about it, because the whole trial should never have taken place,” Butch said. “That tall prosecutor (Len Gregor), he wanted it so bad, and he kept getting mad when something went different than the way he wanted it. The evidence just wasn’t there and they found it out the hard way.”

“I wish there was a camera on their faces when it was read — Judge House, (Catoosa County sheriff’s detective) Tim Deal, the prosecutors, (the mother of one of the alleged girl victims), all of them,” he said. “Judge House seemed to be in shock, but most of all, I looked at Tonya. I saw her as they read each individual count, and with each one she fell a little lower and a little lower, until finally on the last one, her attorneys had to kind of hold her up.”

Well, after reviewing the interview...they were trying to save face and being real careful to try not to break the law. If you watched the whole trial, it was pretty evident that they were reading and watching the blogs,twitter. If not they had some1 else feeding them the info...cause they used it in trial.

I really enjoyed reading the juror's account of the trial. I have been very curious as to how they viewed the goings-on compared to many of us on the outside who never had to opportunity to attend the trial in person. Funny, but it seems that even though "Butch" never had access to the blogosphere or supposedly biased media accounts, he came to pretty much the same conclusion as those who did-- one prosecutor deliberately lied to confuse the jurors and the other threw temper tantrums when he didn't get his way, and the Judge was in shock at the outcome!

Yay for you, Butch! You just managed to school Buzzie, and HAG on how they are suppose to perform their jobs, which is to seek justice for the citizens that they serve-- with honesty, integrity, and professionalism.

The article in the local paper brought me to tears. These jurors held themselves to a standard of fairness and excellence and took their duty seriously. If only the prosecution team had half of the professional ethics that the jurors displayed.

The fundraiser was a success we raised 497 dollars for Tonya. I am so happy it went well. Thanks everyone who came. Brenda meeting you was a treat and everyone else too. I cant wait to do it again. Hopefully Bigger next time. Bill Anderson you were missed as was Kerwyn. You both are so intelligent. When you come to town let us know bill so we can do a get together for your fans to meet you.

“I just hope she’s able to get her life back,” Butch said. “She deserves to have her children back. She’ll never be able to make up for the time that’s been taken away from her. I just hope that this whole thing makes people take notice of child abuse, and that is something that gets looked at closer from now on. Children are the greatest thing in the world, and they should never be abused or ever be led to believe that they were.”

Mr. Anderson- You are a wonderful man. I told my husband I so wish I could just hug you and kiss your face. ;) I can't thank God enough for you. I read The Buzzard's fax and your superior comeback. Just a couple of questions: 1) The Buzzard said that when OutHouse represented Tonya's ex-husband in the divorce that they had no children & it was uncontested. Did I miss something? They had children together, right? 2)The Buzzard also says that child molesters rarely leave physical evidence. Really? Seriously? Then why did they bother to subject the "victims" to exams if it is so rare to find physical evidence? Furthermore, just so that beyond ignorant moron is clear-physical evidence is more prevalent than to be referred to as rare. I am out of wine :( and there is not enough space for me to comment on all the stupidity of this case & the fax. I almost feel sorry for these losers when everyone is done with them. Almost, but not quite. I can't wait to see them twisting in the wind like they were ready to leave Tonya twisting.

Granted, I did first name them Team HAG...But, this blog just brought my inaccuracy to light. There were actually 2 teams working together as one...Team FAG and Team HAG. Define either as you choose but, whether you choose the true English definition ( A bundle of sticks or cigarette ) or the more modern definition, Team FAG still appears to stand for a smoking, burning butthole. Just saying...

I loved reading Butch's account of the jury's decision making process. He totally disproves both Arnt and Buzz when they say jurors made their decision based solely on Tonya's look. I also hated Channel 9's interview. They put their own spin on it. "This juror will always wonder if he made the right decision. What if...What if..." It sounds to me as if this juror has no doubts about voting not guilty. His restless nights will not be due to his vote. However, he may have some sleepless nights thinking about what these parents, ADAs, "experts" and law enforcement have done to these poor children. I pray that the Lord gives him and all of the jurors peace. Bless them all!

@6:46 Thanks for the link, that was great. I suppose this was the same juror "Butch" who in the article by channel 9. Strange how 9 couched the interview in terms of Butch's emotional torment and made it sound like he might be doubting his decision. When you see in this article his real opinion its evident channel 9 had to make a real stretch to come up with that angle.

So, I was thinking about all of the insanity going around and around in North Georgia....I think it would be of worth to add to the pot that there is a common knowledge in Chickamauga that they have their own "mafia". It would be of worth to say that I feel like one of the key players in that group is none other than Dewayne Wilson owner of Angel EMS, husband of Sherri Wilson, one of many operators/owners/heirs of Wilson Funeral Homes, and lastly, Walker County coroner. He not only had personal ties to the case but also Catoosa County governmental/business ties. Additonally, it would make for an interesting investigation into the shady(fradulent?) billing practices of the ambulance service with regard to Medicare. I know people who work/have worked there. He has too much power and plenty of money. You may already know all of this but I just want to make SURE you do.

Very interesting case, litigation conducted by none other than King & Spalding, Atlanta, where US Attorney Sally Quillian Yates was employed prior to her current position. Spaulding and King is a premier litigation firm on the top 100 law Firms list. They negotiated a settlement.

I'm sorry...I just have one question. If the Wilson's have so much money, then why do they bounce checks? I think that they want to appear to have money but are really in debt up to their eyeballs. I honestly don't believe that they could afford to send their 3 girls to private school which is sad for the others at Chickamauga Schools. I know it's not important. I was just wondering. Sorry.

Short version of the Franklin rant.1 - Our case was, superficially, implausible.2 - We had no adult witnesses.3 - The physical evidence was not compelling. 4 - The child witnesses did not tell a clear story, and the therapist who guided them to their story could not convince the jury that she had not influenced the unduly.

With a deck stacked against us like that, we still worked real hard and it's a shame the jury didn't appreciate that.

I see that at least one other person noticed the discrepancy between "Butch's" full, un-commented-upon story, and that produced by News Channel Slime. They really are slime. I grew up in Orlando, and there was a channel that was not altogether the best station when it came to reporting the news. But, Channel Slime really takes the cake. I urge all people to refer to them as Channel Slime rather than channel 9 in the future. I also urge everyone to refer to wildly twisted logical assumptions in the future as "Thong Logic."

The FBI should check into which Juror in this case lives in Arnt's neighborhood and often socialized with his family prior to the case. It obviously didn't help any, but it should be on record and of which the U.S. and State Attorney's Offices should be made aware.

Hey William,What have you got against the county of Dade? I live in Dade county and we have many, many honorable residents. Not all but many. What's you beef with us? Is it just because we are part of the LMJD? Jeez! Talking about guilt by association, this takes the cake.

Thanks for looking out for the people in the LMJC and calling these people out. We couldnt have worst representation and we will try to make the needed changes next elections. I wish there was some way to get them out quicker, its kinda scary living here knowing that if they decide to put you in jail, the 4 stooges can make it happen whether you are guilty or innocent. I am glad Tonya was spared but I have a tough time sleeping at night knowing these people are responsible for putting innocent people in jail for a few bucks from the federal government. We got to see what they do this time but it has been done this way 98% of the time for who knows how long. I would speculate half of those people did absolutely nothing wrong and what this team of prosecutors and judges have done is criminal. Please dont let up until all are exposed.

Mr. Anderson -- a beautiful plea for justice in a U.S court. May I use some or any of your statements so long as I apply them properly to my case? My NV judge is worse than House and is so connected to the "...." --- but with his re-election facing him in June 2010 I want to blog my case in similar fashion to your writings. Could I compensate you to re-write my blog before I publish -- as I am not a journalist.

As the jury chokes on Hussain's malodorous testimony, the prosecution has been reduced to abject whining. "The government is entitled to a fair trial," simpered Assistant U.S. Attorney Jason Halperin, who considers it entirely unfair that the defense is permitted to challenge the credibility of the FBI's hired liar. At http://tinyurl.com/2e2p63d

and this from: An Open Letter to Buzz Franklin by Bill Anderson

So, let us deal with the next paragraph, which is a doozie:

Combined with the dynamics of the internet blogosphere, it created an environment hostile to the State's ability to receive a fair trial and portrayed the victims and their families in a false and negative light. This was an integral, purposeful and shameless part of the defense strategy. This will result in child victims and their supportive family members refusing to come forward for fear of a similar portrayal in the public. My office has never tried cases in the media and we won't start now.

Buzz, give me a break. This is pathetic. At http://tinyurl.com/36phorr

About Me

I teach economics at Frostburg State University in Frostburg, Maryland. We are located on the Allegheny Plateau, and we have cool summers and tough winters.
I am the single father of five children, four of them adopted from overseas and I have two grandchildren. My family and I are members of Faith Presbyterian Church (PCA).